With the presidential election one week away there is so much wrong with our current national leadership situation.
Ever since the July presidential debate, it has become crystal clear that our current president Biden, is severely impaired and not competent to serve as the most powerful elected official in the world. I guess we should be grateful that his vice president has usurped that position on the presidential ticket.
I am certainly not eager to see Ms. Harris, move into the White House. She is a vacuous, lazy, and ineffective politician who basically slept her way into politics. However, as vice president, she has had a vital responsibility, given the president’s condition. It has been her duty to invoke the 25th Amendment to the Constitution and begin the process of his removal
The amendment reads: “Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.”
Not only did she ignore her constitutional duty, she lied repeatedly about his condition.
However unpleasant, this duty of the vice president is essential to national security. In many ways, it may be her most important responsibility. But, like most things she has been involved with, she has utterly failed.
I’m not sure why she has ignored this. The process would leave her not only as the nominee, but also the incumbent, and bolster her rather thin political stature. It would show her to be a person of character who will take on difficult tasks for the good of the nation.
Instead, we are left with a bumbling president, whose loathsome and unelected wife is running cabinet meetings.
The decision for Biden to remain, president, is clearly political and undoubtedly calibrated to bolster Democrat prospects in the upcoming. Perhaps they feel that by admitting their concealment of Biden’s condition, they would bring more scrutiny on their four-year cover-up. The party’s decision to prioritize political power over the national interest is another example of their perfidy.
In a nation with a functioning press, the Democrat’s actions in foisting a demented president on the nation and covering up his dysfunction would be a political scandal that should bury the party’s prospects for years to come.
Let us not reward these traitorous acts with any further political power.
Is there any rational person who still believes that the National Broadcasting System is in any way a reliable source of news?
The network of Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, Harry Reasoner, Roger Mudd, and Tom Brokaw has now abandoned all pretense of impartiality. This is thanks to their atrocious treatment of former RNC chair Ronna McDaniel.
It has been quite obvious that all of the original networks tilt to the left and have done so quietly for many years if not decades. But NBC is unique in that it also produces MSNBC, an unabashedly liberal news/commentary product. Its commentators often move back and forth between the main network and the upstart. The hiring of Ms. McDaniel by NBC proper was probably considered a good move to maintain a thin veneer of bipartisanship.
On the surface, she looked like a good fit. Though not openly disloyal to ex-president Trump, as the niece of never-Trumper” Mitt Romney her loyalty among some Republicans was suspect. Her failures in the 2020 and 2022 elections ultimately forced a change in party leadership more clearly aligned with the Republican nominee. As an NBC contributor, I think she would have probably felt comfortable offering both support and criticism to her party. This should be what the network would want.
But then the wildly left-leaning on-air talent at MSNBC had a “hissy fit” and demanded her firing. This was said to be due to her (tepid) support of President Trump’s voter fraud claims for the 2020 election. The protesters included Chuck Todd, who is NBC’s “Chief Political Analyst” and the former host of that sacred bastion of impartiality “Meet the Press”. Good luck with getting any reasoned political analysis from NBC.
I was one of a significant plurality of Trump voters (as well as some Democrats) who have had doubts over the integrity of the 2020 election. I remember thinking that the Republican Party and many of its members seemed sanguine about the result, and were not unhappy with the change of administration. Ms. McDaniel had to walk a thin tightrope in the aftermath.
In a rational media environment, her concerns for the election would appear to be a decidedly venial sin for a former Republican chairperson. But this is no rationality on the left. The MSNBC team threatened to boycott her as a guest on any of their shows, clearly limiting her utility. After this revolt from the MSNBC talent, NBC relented and released her after three days of employment. I look forward to the legal “bloodbath”.
Of course, those on the left will excuse this by pointing to Fox News as the corresponding conservative version of their hyper-partisan media organization. Certainly, Fox obviously tilts conservative, particularly during prime time, but many of its anchors will deviate from the MAGA dogma quite often (”Fox and Friends” hosts Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy, are good examples).
It is also a given that Fox employs liberal Democrats as on-air talent.
I think of commentators such as Alan Colmes, Juan Williams, Harold Ford, and Jessica Tarlov. They All have represented the liberal viewpoint on Fox shows by assignment. Though the resulting arguments can be heated, these Democrats generally seem to be treated courteously by their fellow talent and are well-supported for book promotion and other outside projects.
There is one other person that Fox hired and employed for some time. That would be Donna Brazile, the former DNC chairman. She is bright and well-spoken and an unabashed liberal. I would argue she carried a mortal sin on her resume, the fact that she leaked questions to Hilary Clinton for a 2016 CNN presidential debate that Brazile moderated. This was well established (she ultimately apologized for it). Despite this, there was no outcry from the conservatives at Fox who generally seemed interested in engaging with her. She worked there for 2 years and was a guest on many of their shows.
I bring this up not so much to promote Fox News, which has its problems, but to demonstrate how bizarre is the behavior over at NBC.
15 to 20 years ago there was no mistaking the major networks for conservative outlets, nor Fox as liberal, but there was a semblance of fairness. Hyperpolarization of news outlets towards either side of the argument will inevitably be the source of untruths, either by direct misrepresentation or by strategic omission.
This leads to an even more polarized electorate that tolerates the lies and then wants more. As a result, the country is fragmented and thus weakened.
If you’re searching for truth, it won’t be found at the Peacock network.
I would be honored if you would share this with friends.
Hemlocks on the Trail:(Nikon D800E, Nikkor 50mm f1.8)
For a variety of reasons, I have not been doing much writing, or for that matter photography, for about a year now. I’m not sure what happened, but I think, the absolute deluge of troubling events over the past year or three, has sort of overloaded my psyche, and suppressed my creative muse.
To break this drought, I wrote this hopefully non-controversial piece that was published in The American Thinker on March 24th. I’m not sure that I will remain so diplomatic as we go forward
One of the happy cycles in my life occurs every 3 to 4 years when I drive home in a new vehicle. However, for me, the current car market is a challenge.
I currently own a great vehicle. It is a 2018 Audi allroad, a small but luxurious station wagon, with a sophisticated all-wheel drive system, and a powerful 2 Liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine. I have kept it for longer than usual, but I am beginning to be concerned about maintaining this complex automobile once it is out of warranty. So, why don’t I just buy the new 2024 model? The problem is, that Audi, like most manufacturers these days, has “gone astray”.
In 2018 when my car was built, Audi was building cars with features controlled with a simple and intuitive driver interface. One could navigate through systems with tactile controls requiring minimal distraction from the road.
For the 2020 model year, the engineers at Ingolstadt decided that touch screens would become the new control method in Audi interiors. Many of the physical buttons were removed. Controls are now in the center screen, activated by pushing on a flat panel without any haptic feedback. In many cases, previously simple tasks are now buried behind several menus.
Recently, my car required service. I requested a similar updated model as a loaner, so I could experience the new interface. Many of the conveniences of my car had been eliminated, and I could find no safe way to quickly activate functions without focusing on the screen and not the road. There was some voice control, but it was an inadequate substitute for buttons. In short, it drove me nuts. So, for me, no new allroad.
Audi is not alone. The sister divisions of Volkswagen and Porsche which had been models of simplicity and logic, have been infected with the same nonsense. In fact, it has spread throughout the industry.
I believe that automobile companies have several motivations. First, touchscreen technology is fashionable, and no one wants to be seen to be falling behind. And I will admit that the aesthetics of these dashboards, and the access to the information, can at times be compelling… If you weren’t trying to drive.
There are also cost benefits, as one might expect. A traditional dashboard requires separate wiring for each manual control circuit. Digital dashboards and controls are configured by programming and can be much less complex to set up. New features can also be added quickly. Touchscreens will also help to facilitate the industry’s new bad idea: automotive options such as heated seats, available only by subscription with monthly payments required.
So, for the first time in my life, I find myself drawn to models that have been in circulation long enough to have traditional control layouts. This typically means cars that are reaching the end of their model run. One other issue with touchscreen controls is the expense involved in their replacement. These screens control the core functioning of modern automobiles. If they break, the car is essentially “bricked.” I priced, for instance, the 2 screens on my allroad. The instrument cluster screen is very expensive at about $1200). The center screen, where the navigation, audio, and auto systems are controlled is an eye-watering $5500. It could be very expensive to own one of these cars if they are not under warranty. It also begs the question: Who will be able to afford to repair these vehicles in 5-10 years should this technology begin to fail?
As I age, it bothers me to sound like a Luddite, especially with computer technology, with which I am otherwise quite comfortable. I do think however that this technology has demonstrable downsides. Perhaps someday, it will go the way of the “talking cars” of the 80s which disappeared rather quickly. Perhaps voice controls will become a workaround for the crappy interfaces.
To me, touchscreen interfaces, much like the relentless promotion of electric vehicles, are part of a larger pattern in the automotive industry which seems determined to sell to us, things that we do not want. Part of this behavior is due to upcoming government regulations. Despite this, it feels as though the industry no longer has any concern for the wishes of the average consumer. Sadly, but predictably, this philosophy, combined with their rapacious pricing during the pandemic, has sent the industry into a tailspin with plummeting sales and falling prices. Maybe it is a good time to buy after all.
I would be honored if you would share this with friends.
This article, edited, appeared in The American Thinker on May 16th, 2023
Several weeks ago, on my way to lunch, I stopped at the testing facility in our hospital for my weekly COVID test. This has been a requirement of my employment for at least the last year and a half after I refused vaccination. The pretty young woman that has been assisting me, collected my sample. She then informed me that the testing facility was closing for good later today. Subsequently, the hospital administration minimized the requirements for masking within the facility. With these developments, it felt as though the COVID debacle had finally ended.
Reflecting on this, I think back over the 3+ years and cannot escape the profound effect it has had on my life both during the pandemic and now afterward. I have seen death, certainly particularly in older patients and those with comorbid problems. But I have also seen fear and anxiety as a catalyst of social change, and generally not for the good. I have seen factionalism develop over differences in one’s level of vigilance and concern over the disease burden, and later about attitudes towards treatment and vaccination.
I lost friendships. In the beginning it was over the fear of being in contact with me as a caregiver for these patients. Later it was because I invoked natural immunity, and avoided vaccination. I endured their ridicule and even anger about my quaint notions of viral immunity, ideas that would have seemed completely rational, 2 years before.
Now things are changing. Very quietly I think people have grown to accept the notion that this virus was born in the Wuhan lab. It became clear that the draconian lockdowns were of little help, and left a lot of economic, social, and educational damage. They are finally beginning to understand that natural immunity, though not perfect, is likely to be more durable than that provoked by “boosters”.
It is also beginning to sink in, that the vaccines, were untested, minimally helpful and are likely to an extent unsafe, especially for the young. The lack of acceptance of the new bivalent injection I think confirms a new public wariness. Likewise, there has been a pronounced lack of enthusiasm for pediatric inoculation.
But for me, there have been much broader revelations.
As a physician in my 40th year of practice, the events of the past several years have had a profound effect on the way I think of the care I have been rendering.
The CDC, and NIH, manipulated the government, and the willing press, into supporting incredibly corrupt behavior. Prestigious medical journals, such as the Lancet, suspended their usual stringent review processes to publish fraudulent data. The regulatory agencies, and Pharma, acting in concert, punished non-doctrinaire opinions. They manipulated our academic institutions by the issuance and withholding of grant money. Leaders such as the beloved Dr. Fauci promoted phony letters to the editor decrying the lab leak origin story. This was done to protect the NIH and its likely illegal contributions to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for gain-of-function research.
Because of all of this, I looked back and wondered about my entire career. Was everything a lie? Were there medications, perfectly adequate, that I was convinced to discontinue in favor of new patented and expensive medications, with less well-understood safety profiles? How many of the other articles that I had read over the years were corrupt documents, meant to bolster the profits of the pharmaceutical industry? Just how badly have I been manipulated?
As a physician, particularly at my age, I have tried hard to remain current with my specialty. But how much of the latest information I absorbed served only to support the lucrative relationship between academic medicine and their sponsors at the pharmaceutical companies.
I never meant to bring too much drama to this pandemic, which I was fairly sure, even early on, would not be as severe as the doomsayers predicted. But I failed to anticipate the more profound interpersonal, economic, and professional impacts it would have on my life and that of others.
There is a punch line here. Despite being completely asymptomatic, and despite the fact, that months ago, the CDC declared random testing to be useless my last test was… positive.
Feels like a fitting end for this nonsense…at least for now.
The FDA is broken. In a three-year span, they have morphed from a regulatory agency that set the standard for the world, to an illogical, incompetent, and apparently corrupt organization running interference for Big Pharma. Three of their recent inane decisions illustrate this metamorphosis.
It is understood, that the current inoculations for Covid 19, are no longer functional as vaccines. At best, they might be attenuating the severity of infections. Dr. Fauci himself recently acknowledged this. It has been accepted over the years that coronaviruses make poor subjects for vaccines given their tendency to mutate rather rapidly. If there was any doubt of this, SARS co-V2 has proven this tendency.
It’s one thing for the vaccines to be ineffective. It is entirely another problem that they are, by the CDC’s own data, responsible for more adverse effects, and deaths in the 18 months they have been in use, than all of the 26 other vaccines monitored for the last 30 years.
A functioning FDA would recognize this and put a halt to the current vaccines which are not only dangerous but designed for a virus that essentially no longer exists. In fact, the drug companies themselves are talking about the fact that need an updated vaccine for the omicron variants. The vaccine they propose will target the first omicron variant, which has since mutated to multiple new sub-variants.
But these vaccines are huge profit centers for the pharmaceutical industry. So the FDA continues this charade.
Instead, the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee recently voted 21/0 to approve the use of the current ineffective vaccines, to immunize children between six months and five years of age. This is a group for whom the risk of significant illness and death from Covid 19, is near zero.
The FDA used to maintain strict oversight over the vaccine industry. This is why would take roughly 5 years to move the vaccine to “approved” status. It takes time obviously for long-term safety data studies. But because of this, vaccine safety in the United States was impressive. And also because of this, it was impractical to even think about vaccinating for rapidly mutating organisms.
Now we approve vaccines in about six months. And vaccine safety has done to hell
The current FDA also voted on new vaccine proposals from Pfizer and Moderna. They have proposed a bivalent vaccine that includes mRNA code for protein specific for omicron. The committee voted 19 to 2 to approve this essentially as a modification of the existing products. The drug companies stated that they can probably make the product available by October. So once again, we create essentially a new vaccine that includes different mRNA coding for different proteins, one we may be compelled to take, with none of the previous precautions that kept us safe. We already know how that turns out.
Finally, we have another of Pharma’s favorite tools, the emergency use authorization. According to the FDA, an EUA is granted when “there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives”. Here the FDA has completely lost its way. In this case, they inexplicably granted emergency authorization to Novavax’s new Covid vaccine. They did this despite the fact that there are already two formally approved vaccines. Not that we’ve never seen these vaccines, because contrary to their own rules, the FDA continues to permit Pfizer and Moderna to distribute their unapproved products which are still being given under their EUA. Conveniently, this preserves the legal immunity for the two pharmaceutical giants.
I have nothing against the Novavax product. It uses a more time-tested technology and it might even be a little safer than the mRNA vaccines. Unfortunately, it still involves the spike protein (which is arguably toxic), it is still targeted at the original coronavirus and it also seems to cause myocarditis in young men. There was absolutely no reason for it to be rushed into service.
Regulatory capture is an economic theory that regulatory agencies may come to be dominated by the interests they regulate and not by the public interest. The result is that the agency acts in ways that benefit the interests it is supposed to regulate. Certainly, the FDA appears to be behaving in a way that brings this theory to life. With behavior that is this egregious, it is impossible to trust in the medications and vaccines that the agency approves. For this physician, this is a national crisis.
Covid 19 was never a good candidate for a vaccine strategy. Undoubtedly the pharmaceutical industry understood the science, but also could not resist the potential for an enormous profit. And I think they knew the FDA would play along.
Let me tell a story. It details probably the most important event in the suppression of the drug Ivermectin for treatment of Covid-19 a medication that had the potential to have saved many lives.
Dr. Teresa Lawrie is an MD, and the leader of the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy in Bath, UK. Her incredibly tedious job is to statistically evaluate medical studies and provide data to the National Health Service so that clinicians can decide on therapy guidelines. In Britain, she is been referred to as “the conscience of medicine”.
Andrew Hill MD, Ph.D. is a virologist and from his bio, a senior visiting Research Fellow in the Pharmacology Department at Liverpool University. He is considered an expert on therapy for HIV/AIDS. He is also a consultant to the World Health Organization. He is considered a very powerful voice who can influence medical practice worldwide.
UNITAID is a not-for-profit organization whose website states that it “connects innovators who develop better health products with people who need them the most”. It is been heavily funded by the Gates Foundation.
Apparently, in late 2020, studies began to accumulate looking at the potential of the drug Ivermectin in the treatment of SARS Co-V2. This antiparasitic agent was also known to have antiviral properties. This attracted the attention of both the WHO and Dr. Lawrie’s organization. The WHO contracted with Dr. Hill to evaluate the data. Independently, the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy took on the same task. This involved performing a meta-analysis. This is a process where studies on a topic are collected and are analyzed for their quality. The best studies are pooled and the results analyzed. There are very well-established protocols for this.
Dr. Hill and Dr. Lawrie completed separate analyses and the results for both were exciting. There seemed to be a real benefit to using Ivermectin as a treatment for Covid. They concluded that the reduction in deaths could be as much as 60 to 85%. Both were comfortable with the quality of their results. According to Dr. Lawrie, they compared notes and together pledged to push hard for the rapid approval of the drug, given the prevailing pandemic.
In January 2021 Dr. Hill was among the scientists who testified in support of Ivermectin the NIH’s COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel. Subsequently, the NIH changed its recommendation from against the use, to neither for or against the use, the same designation given to convalescent plasma, and monoclonal antibodies, both of which have been subsequently used for Covid. Ivermectin continues to carry that recommendation on the current NIH website.
Then something odd happened. Dr. Hill finally released a preprint of his meta-analysis, with all of his data. But the conclusion of the paper questioned the quality of the data and called for more research. This was obviously an opinion severely at odds with his previous stance. Many people, were taken completely by surprise, most prominently Dr. Lawrie. She arranged for a meeting via Zoom. Here is a link to a documentary that describes these events, and includes a video of the actual meeting. It is completely infuriating.
During the meeting, Dr. Hill admits that people from UNITAID had input on his conclusions. You can observe his demeanor and draw your own conclusions.
Dr. Hill’s promise of continued support never materialized. In fact, he ended up withdrawing his meta-analysis due to accusations that one of the included studies was fraudulent. To my knowledge, the fact of that has never been proven. Interestingly, because Dr. Lawrie’s paper included more studies, she was able to remove that same questionable data without affecting the outcome significantly.
Another interesting fact: shortly after all of this, Dr. Hill’s parent organization, Liverpool University, received a $40 million grant … from UNITAID. This was to set up the “Centre of Excellence for Long-acting Therapeutics” which would appear to be part of Dr. Hill’s department of Pharmacology. Coincidence?
As Dr. Lawrie notes in the documentary, over the intervening year, there have been many more studies on Ivermectin as well as striking observational data supporting the drug’s efficacy. Yet despite the NIH’s “neither for nor against” position, the drug has become essentially unavailable in the states, and physicians have been disciplined for its use.
In the meantime, based on one company-sponsoredstudy each, two expensive new drugs Pfizer’s Paxlovid and Merck’s Molnupivinir were quickly granted emergency use authorization and are becoming readily available. I for one, am glad of this. Paxlovid in particular may save lives. There is no safety data, however for either, unlike Ivermectin which has been literally given to billions of people and has been proven to be extremely safe.
I have no passion for the drug Ivermectin. I certainly do not have any financial ties to the medication. That I think, is the problem, because essentially no one does. This is likely why there have been no well-funded large studies. And if Ivermectin is indeed efficacious, it would threaten the profits made on vaccines, and now on the new antiviral medications. As I approach the end of my career, the thought that a promising treatment for Covid 19 has been actively discouraged is very troubling to this physician. It makes me wonder what other cheap and effective off-patent therapies have been similarly suppressed.
This was originally published in The American Thinker on January 12th,2022. It has been slightly edited from that article
We are now officially entering the third year of the Wuhan surprise. We are experiencing a brand-new SARS co-V2 variant, Omicron, which is sweeping through the population like a lot of nasty winter respiratory infections. Except that we test for it. And we know its name.
As of early January, the Omicron makes up roughly 95% of cases in the Northeast (CDC data). In my state of Pennsylvania, for instance, our peak case numbers were triple what they were last December. Our hospital, and ICU occupancy so far however is slightly lower than last year, attesting to the more benign nature of this particular bug.
I was looking through the hospitalization data, on the Johns Hopkins site. As a former critical care specialist, two things are curious to me. Number one is that the total number of ICU beds in the country has fallen from 91,000 in January 2021 to 80,000 now. I’m sure that a portion of that decrease is due to acute illness of ICU personnel, given Omicron’s infectivity, and vaccine avoidance. I do wonder however how many of those beds were lost due to the firing of ICU staff due to their vaccines status.
The second strange data point is that in the US as a whole or Pennsylvania in particular, there are said to be roughly 20% of ICU beds unoccupied. In my experience over the years, intensive care units tend to be full, and we accept new admissions only by transferring out the least ill. If I was running a 20 bed ICU and had 4 open beds, I’d be feeling pretty comfortable. Maybe this data is wrong, but if it’s not, this is hardly a crisis.
As of January 2022, a majority of the population has been coerced into multiple inoculations, with spike protein-producing mRNA. Despite this, we are seeing record numbers. How could this be?
Data from Britain suggest that roughly 50% of coronavirus patients in the hospital, were admitted for something else. In the United States, those numbers fall between 30% and 60% depending on the locale. In our hospital, there has been an obvious reduction in acuity for patients that carry the Covid diagnosis, given the benign characteristics of Omicron.
It has become rather clear that natural immunity and/or vaccination/booster status are irrelevant in the current surge. In fact, in the case of vaccination, there is data from Iceland and Denmark suggesting that the population most prone to Omicron are those who have had the full original course of the vaccine. Here’s the data from Iceland, where the population is 91% fully vaccinated. If you look at infections per 100,000 people based on vaccine status, the fully vaccinated, have the highest prevalence of infection. Now in the same data set, it’s clear that the vaccinated have less severe disease, which we have been saying for some time, In the case of Omicron, for most people, that point is moot, given the mild nature of the syndrome.
Again I say, if you’re interested in being vaccinated or boosted, that’s your choice. But given Omicron’s obvious vaccine resistance ( which is likely to persist in future variants), the strategy of forcing a monovalent vaccine on the population during a pandemic has clearly failed.
Data out of Israel suggests efforts there with a fourth Pfizer booster have been ineffective in preventing the spread of Omicron.
In my circles over the last month, I’ve had a fairly large group of friends and acquaintances, who have been infected. These include the vaxed and boosted, the group formerly known as fully vaccinated, the unvaccinated, and those like me with natural immunity. All of us, at a variety of ages, have had a roughly 3 to 4 day viral upper respiratory syndrome, of little consequence. I know from my practice, that this is also being seen more broadly in the community.
Another thing I have noticed is that given their cold-like illness, people that suspect they have omicron are reluctant to be tested, so as not to be inconvenienced by having to isolate. This may be contributing to spread, but also signals a change in attitude towards this illness among many people.
In a sensible world, given this data, public health officials would quietly back away from the insistence on mass inoculation, and begin to feature therapeutics in their approach to Covid. I wouldn’t actually expect them to admit failure, but perhaps only to change their emphasis. Instead, they are doubling down.
In my former life as a doctrinaire practitioner, I would’ve been loath to consider the wild claims of medical conspiracy theorists. Some talk about the vaccine containing graphene, and other nanoparticles meant to monitor and control. I certainly don’t believe in these theories. But the escalating efforts to penalize the unvaccinated by their governments seem so irrational, that it is not unreasonable to wonder: what the hell is going on?
Why insist, that an increasingly ineffective immunization be given again and again, at shorter intervals, to the entire human population, including children who tend not to be severely affected? And how can we force injections with products that are still officially investigational, and not FDA approved? And why, as these vaccines have the highest rate of adverse effects by far, according to the CDC’s VAERS data, do we insist? And by firing reluctant healthcare workers, who have a fairly high rate of vaccine hesitancy (I wonder why?), we are stripping the healthcare system of talent we now claim to desperately need.
None of this passes any test of common sense. More and more I think people are beginning to realize this, and are growing skeptical. Even elements of the press are starting to ask questions like: “how many more boosters will we be expected to take?”
There is an alternate way, as shown by countries as diverse as India, Mexico, and Japan. We need to encourage early treatment, with cheap safe, and proven antiviral therapy such as hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, in protocols that have already been developed. Pfizers new drug Paxlovid may be useful if further studies confirm safety and efficacy. If people wish to be vaccinated, fine, but only with products approved for use by the FDA (Pfizer’s Comirnaty). This would mean patients would have legal recourse if they were to suffer a devastating side effect.
We have a right to expect competency, not corruption from our public health officials.
It has been 18-1/2 months since our world was essentially turned upside down by the spread of a relative of the common cold virus. During this period, for better or worse, given my job as a pulmonary physician, I have attempted to write truthfully on the coronavirus situation.
A lot of the things I wrote in the early going have been lost. The articles disappeared; around the time I changed the format of my website. I have approximate copies of them, but most were edited after posting, so they are different.
I want to first discuss the current status of the vaccines that are being forced upon us. All 3 are being given under an Emergency Use Authorization or EUA. The FDA defines an EUA as:
“FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.”
Under this rule, the FDA has issued EUA’s for 3 vaccines, the PfizerBioNTech, Moderna, and the Johnson & Johnson products. This EUA comes with essentially blanket immunity for the drug companies for any liability due to adverse events.
So, let us talk about adverse effects. Now I have been reluctant to cast aspersions on the vaccines in these articles. This is because at least for specific risk groups, I thought the “jabs” were advisable. I did not wish to suppress their use
Discussing adverse effects, however, becomes important when we discuss the blatant rule manipulation by the FDA.
According to the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting Site (VAERs) as of November 26, 2021, there have been 927,740 adverse events, and 19,532 related deaths reported for the 3 vaccines in the 12 months since they were introduced. These deaths do not include roughly 6000 deaths that were erased from the site back in July. There have been 859,919 adverse effects and 93199 related deaths reported for all of the 25 other vaccines listed in the database over the last 20 years. This means that the 3 Covid vaccines have the highest side effect profile of any vaccines ever produced. Keep that in mind.
You may say, well, they have given over 400 million doses of vaccine just in the United States. No wonder there are so many problems. That might be correct. So, let us look at deaths per million doses. Again, as of November 26, there were 19.51 deaths per million doses for the 3 vaccines. The vast majority of other vaccines are between 0 and 4 deaths per million doses. Only mumps and measles come anywhere in the vicinity of the Covid vaccines with 9 and 14.7 deaths per million respectively. It is noted on the database that these 2 vaccines have been given significantly smaller numbers than the others.
So where is the FDA-approved vaccine Comirnaty? Shockingly, it is unavailable, Pfizer, Moderna, and J and J are allowed to continue distribution of their previous products which continue to be mandated. The FDA has a very confusing statement on this:
“Comirnaty has the same formulation as the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.
There are no data available on the interchangeability of Comirnaty with either Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine or Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine.”
Then why the hell are they still being distributed?
In this case, “legally distinct” means among other things that the vaccines maintain their legal immunity whereas Comirnaty would not.
In fact, by the FDA’s original rules, once approved only Comirnaty should be available, none of the 3 original vaccines should be distributed. The others should be withdrawn until they also obtain FDA approval.
So, with this FDA sleight-of-hand, people are being mandated to take an “experimental” (the FDA’s own term for EUA drugs) vaccine. It is providing a legal shield for vaccines with an unprecedented rate of adverse events and deaths.
There is a document called the Nuremberg Codes. They were written as a reaction to the Nuremberg trials of among others, doctors accused of barbaric medical experimentation on their captives. These codes are considered seminal guidance for medical experimentation. The very first code reads:
“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have the legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion”
Tell that to the military, and to other federal employees.
So with all this mandated vaccination, we must be doing great this year, right? According to the state health department, 58% of Pennsylvanians are fully vaccinated. Yet statistically we seem to be on a very similar numeric path to last year’s infection numbers during December, prior to the availability of vaccines. My own hospital is seeing a lot of cases, as many or more than last year.
The suggested solution: more vaccines.
Let us move on to some new information on natural immunity. Shortly after I published the last essay, I became aware of a letter published in the New England Journal of Medicine from the Weill-Cornell Medical Center in Doha, Qatar. It described a large study involving approximately 353,000 documented nonvaccinated Covid recovered between February 2020 and April 2021. They looked at the incident of reinfection, particularly with an eye toward severe disease, and death.
There were 1304 cases of reinfection which was .03%. Compared to primary infections the percentage of severe illness as defined by the WHO in the reinfected was 0.12% there were no cases of critical illness and no deaths in the reinfection group. The study concluded that based on this data, natural immunity was roughly 85% effective or better.
Interestingly Trump-appointed federal judge Terry Doughty, from the Western District of Louisiana quoted this study and others in a memorandum. It was written to support an injunction placing a nationwide halt to the Biden administration’s attempts to mandate vaccination for all healthcare workers. The fact that there was no exception for previously infected healthcare workers was one issue for him. He wrote:
“these studies overwhelmingly conclude that natural immunity provides equivalent or greater protection against severe infection than immunity generated by COVID-19 vaccines.”
It’s good to see this recognized by the court.
The Omicron variant continues in the news. It is spread to over 20 countries, including the US. It is so far producing milder disease, and less resource utilization, than previous variants despite its increased infectivity. Obviously, we will need to watch this closely, but once again these characteristics would be consistent with a virus that is evolving to coexist with its host (us).
I don’t want to be too cavalier, but a rapidly spreading, but mild coronavirus might be just the thing to push us into true “herd immunity”. Whether it is this variant or a future even milder mutation, this does suggest a way we can exit out of this cycle of disease.
I have gotten a lot of criticism for my lack of fealty to the vaccine cult. I started out back in March 2020 much like everyone else. I was intimidated by this new pathogen, especially as I was going to have to care for afflicted patients. I was open to the restrictions given the need to protect the population, particularly the elderly. When the prospect of vaccines became real, I became as excited as anyone.
My current “evolved” attitude comes from watching Fauci et al lie, manipulate, contradict themselves. I saw them suppress clearly effective repurposed medications, seemingly in the interests of big Pharma. I have watched these bureaucrats say that there is no need for masks, only then to mandate masks, then even suggest multiple masks. I have watched them maintain harmful restrictions on commerce long after it would appear to have been necessary. I have heard them dismiss the idea of vaccine mandates, and then vigorously enforce them. I have seen a disconnect between the apparent vaccine loss of effectiveness and their increased zeal for even more doses.
I have been a physician for almost 40 years. All of my training tells me that we have been lied to at every turn. This leaves me dejected for my profession and concerned for the future.
You do not need to be a physician, however, to feel in your gut that this is all nonsense.
And I think increasingly, people sense this.
As always I’d be honored if you would share this post
Header image: Corn in Snow (Fujifilm X Pro 2, XF 56mm f1.2)
It has been 21 months of social upheaval and weirdness since the gift of love from the NIH and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. In that time period, we have seen a widespread loss of faith in our government health apparatus based on contradictory, illogical, and frankly nefarious behavior.
I’ve divided this article into two parts:
Part number one was intended to be published on 18 November, but frankly, for a variety of reasons, including sloth, I didn’t get around to it.
Part two is being written today. I’m doing this in part because of new developments that are significant, and also as a bit of “I told you so”.
Part one: November 18
Overall U.S. Covid “cases” are falling, particularly in the South, while some isolated northern states are having surges. We have seen this seasonal pattern before, with the arrival of the outdoor recreation season in some climates, while others seek shelter as temperatures drop.
If you look at recent data, the percentage of hospitalizations and death, as a percentage of the total “cases” has also been falling. This is likely due to multiple factors, including vaccination, increasing natural immunity, and better care particularly in the ICUs. It may also be due in part to the more benign characteristics of the current “delta” variant which is now dominant in the population.
A virus can be thought of as a small biological machine. They are not considered as living entities, but more as mechanisms. The spread and dominance of variants tend to occur when mutations cause a particular set of useful characteristics:
1. The virus evolves to be more infectious. This could mean that smaller numbers of viruses are needed to institute an infection, and/or the virus changes characteristics to survive better between hosts. The virus can also evolve to create symptoms in the host that facilitate spread, such as coughing or diarrhea.
2. The virus becomes less lethal. These little mechanisms derive no benefit from killing their host. Arguably the virus can spread more rapidly if the symptoms are mild, and the host remains in contact with others. Decreasing lethality will also be caused by an increase in acquired immunity in the population (and perhaps their offspring). In other words, we and the virus evolve so that we can coexist.
Other than the outlier viruses SARS CoV, MERS Co-V, and SARS-CoV2, there have been four coronavirus types that typically circulate in the population and cause respiratory infections. These typically cause mild to moderate symptoms though they too can be the cause of pneumonia, and ultimately death, in vulnerable populations. They are estimated to be responsible for 10 to 30% of viral respiratory infections.
Now here’s the thing. Because they are generally benign, and there has been no therapy identified specifically for these viruses, we generally do not test for them. And we certainly do not isolate or vaccinate. But we do for Covid. And at some point, that is going to have to change.
Coronaviruses in general have been endemic in the human population for thousands and thousands of years. Acquired immunity to them tends to be “relative” in that people tend to be reinfected multiple times in their lives, but typically with modest symptoms.
That may explain the performance of the current vaccines. At this point, they do not seem to prevent infection and spread but do seem to blunt the severity of the illness that results (though this effect is also waning). The point is, that SARS-CoV2, will likely become an endemic virus, and any expectation that you will not be reinfected at some point is probably unrealistic. At some point, we will need to normalize our behavior towards this infection and cease with all the isolation and dramatics.
There is some hope. As much as I despise Pharma, and their actions regarding hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, Merck, and now Pfizer, have introduced oral medications for Covid. Happily, these drugs are patented, so the pharmaceutical companies will make a lot of money and so happily promote their use.
Pfizer claims that their medication Paclovid, reduced hospitalization by 89% and death by 100% in their clinical trials. If this bears out, it would definitely be a significant development, with the potential to change both the epidemiology and psychology of this illness. Merck claims that their new medication Molnupiravir, was roughly 50/100% effective using the same criteria.
In case you wondered, in several meta-analyses, Ivermectin is about 65% for early treatment, with similar numbers for late treatment. It’s about 87% effective for prophylaxis.
I wonder, given these new medications, and the growing sense that the vaccines seem both relatively risky and ineffective, that Pharma will deemphasize the “jabs” for their new therapeutics. This may be especially true now that monoclonal antibody cocktails given subcutaneously, have recently been shown to have potential as COVID-19 prophylaxis for as long as eight months.
Part two:
So that was written on November 15-17. It is now 2 weeks later and there have been significant developments since.
The number one development would be the continual deterioration in vaccine performance. We are now seeing significant numbers of fully vaccinated people admitted to ICUs, in some cases never discharged. Both director Walinsky, and Dr. Fauci have been forced to acknowledge this. Their answer: inject patients with even more spike protein mRNA.
There is an abstract published in the Journal Circulation that studied the body’s release of certain biomarkers predictive of cardiac complications after receiving the mRNA vaccine. It concluded: “that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.”
Now, remember back in 1998. A paper was published by one study group investigating the effect of hormone replacement therapy for postmenopausal females on the heart. It concluded surprisingly, that cardiac outcomes were worse in females who were receiving HRT. In an instant, HRT ceased as an option for women.
Let’s see whether this Circulation article has a similar effect on these vaccines (I doubt it).
Poor Merck. They spent the last year impugning their old drug Ivermectin for the treatment of Covid 19. Shockingly they then released their new oral therapeutic, Molnupiravir which they initially reported as having a 50% reduction in illness and death when used treatment of SARs-CoV2. This made Dr. Fauci very excited.
Fun fact: Molnupiravir works by inserting errors into the viral genetic code. Apparently, during the trials, subjects were required to refrain from heterosexual sexual intercourse, and in the case of females, be using birth control. What could go wrong?
Earlier this week they downgraded that effectiveness number to roughly 30%. This is a problem when Pfizer is reporting 89% effectiveness of their new oral medication Paclovid. If this data bears out I would imagine Molnupiravir will be a bust. Karma is a bitch.
Just so you know, the geniuses in our government have already arranged to buy $1.7 billion worth of this apparent loser. Oops.
By the way, the much more effective Pfizer drug uses a similar mechanism of action to… You guessed it… Ivermectin.
And now we have the Omicron variant emerging from South Africa. This apparently has the World Health Organization in a tizzy, which the press is dutifully reporting. This variant is said to carry multiple mutations including changes to the spike protein (you know, where the vaccines work). It is said to be more infectious than Delta, but there are indications that symptoms are generally mild. There is obviously great hand wringing that it will be vaccine-resistant (like delta already is?).
Maybe they can lock us down again this Christmas.
To close this up, let me review the facts we need to remember to avoid being manipulated by the hype.
SARs-CoV2 is a respiratory virus, much less severe than SARs1, and over time, roughly as deadly as a bad influenza season.
We are being pushed to take multiple doses of hastily developed, still investigational monovalent vaccines. We are vaccinating during a pandemic which generally a bad idea. The vaccines over time do not really appear to be very effective.
The new variant is likely doing what viruses are supposed to do; evolving to become more infectious but less virulent. It is frightening to the medical establishment, because its spike protein mutations threaten to completely discredit their entrenched “vaccine only “policies.
Given the large percentage the population with pre-existing Coronavirus exposure, and ongoing SARs-CoV2 infections, there is likely a high percentage of the population with broad-based immunity, even to new variants.
There are effective IV and now oral medications. Some are repurposed, but there is a new oral med they may actually allow us to use to treat this infection when it occurs.
I apologize for the length of this. I confess that writing these articles helps me to disperse the toxic degree of cognitive dissonance I experience when ingesting Covid information from the government and the media.
I very much appreciate your interest, your shares, and your comments.
